A few months ago, Microsoft finally blinked and provided a way for Windows 10 users to gain “free” access to the Windows 10 Extended Security Update program. For regular users to gain access to this program, their options are to either pay around $30, pay 1000 Microsoft points, or to sign up for the Windows Backup application to synchronise their settings to Microsoft’s computers (the “cloud”). In other words, in order to get “free” access to extended security updates for Windows 10 after the 25 October end-of-support deadline, you have to start using OneDrive, and will have to start paying for additional storage since the base 5GB of OneDrive storage won’t be enough for backups.
And we all know OneDrive is hell.
Thanks to the European Union’s Digital Markets Act, though, Microsoft has dropped the OneDrive requirement for users within the European Economic Area (the EU plus Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein). Citing the DMA, consumer rights organisations in the EU complained that Microsoft’s OneDrive requirement was in breach of EU law, and Microsoft has now given in. Of course, dropping the OneDrive requirement only applies to consumers in the EU/EEA; users in places with much weaker consumer protection legislation, like the United States, will not benefit from this move.
Consumer rights organisations are lauding Microsoft’s move, but they’re not entirely satisfied just yet. The main point of contention is that the access to the Extended Security Update program is only valid for one year, which they consider too short. In a letter, Euroconsumers, one of the consumer rights organisations, details this issue.
At the same time, several points from our original letter remain relevant. The ESU program is limited to one year, leaving devices that remain fully functional exposed to risk after October 13, 2026. Such a short-term measure falls short of what consumers can reasonably expect for a product that remains widely used and does not align with the spirit of the Digital Content Directive (DCD), nor the EU’s broader sustainable goals. Unlike previous operating system upgrades, which did not typically require new hardware, the move to Windows 11 does. This creates a huge additional burden for consumers, with some estimates suggesting that over 850 million active devices still rely on million Windows 10 and cannot be upgraded due to hardware requirements. By contrast, upgrades from Windows 7 or 8 to Windows 10 did not carry such limitations.
↫ Eurconsumer’s letter
According to the group, the problem is exacerbated by the fact that Microsoft is much more aggressive in phasing out support for Windows 10 than for previous versions of Windows. Windows 10 is being taken behind the shed four years after the launch of Windows 11, while Windows XP and Windows 7 enjoyed 7-8 years. With how many people are still using Windows 10, often with no way to upgrade but buying new hardware, it’s odd that Microsoft is trying to kill it so quickly.
In any event, we can chalk this up as another win for consumers in the European Union, with the Digital Markets Act once again creating better outcomes than in other regions of the world.
I mean, I use it for a decade+ now. It’s fine.
@drstorm
The problem with OneDrive is that most users just want cloud storage–a network drive in the cloud. Microsoft wants OneDrive to be a synchronization tool and to keep you from storing files locally. If you agree with them, all is well. If you do not, “OneDrive is hell”.
Microsoft REALLY wants to use OneDrive as your primary storage target. Microsoft wants to migrate all your documents to it. There is way too much “helping”, much of which may be working directly against user wishes. And if there is suddenly a network or authentication issue, you may find yourself locked out of files you thought were local or have your local versions “synced” to older versions from the cloud. I had one sleepless night where my local edits kept disappearing due to cloud sync issues. Office kept deciding that the versions in the cloud were the “real” ones. I disagreed. Nightmare.
I have all my files fully synced on my pc. I don’t know what you are talking about.
“It works fine for me so everyone else must be lying!” is not the flex you think it is.
“It doesn’t work fine for me so everyone else must be lying!” is not the flex you think it is.
@kwanbis:
First, unlike your comment, no one else implied that. You responded to a post stating they were having an issue with OneDrive, wherein you implied that since it’s working fine for you, the other person was lying. The fact that you are on this website at all confirms you have a certain level of competence with technology, so you must know that not everyone has the same experience with anti-consumer services like OneDrive. You’re not an idiot. Therefore, this Pee-Wee Herman “I know you are but what am I” bullshit just outs you as a troll, or at the very least a major asshole. Be better.
I use both, Google Suite with google drive, and Office 365 with OneDrive. I also used to use dropbox and tried many others. OneDrive works just fine. It is used by lots of corps, millions of users. I am sure there is a very weird edge case where something is not working. And I don’t like how Microsoft likes to push it, but it works just fine.
@kwanbis:
Thank you, now that we are talking like adults we can discuss this rationally.
Any software solution is going to have issues, bugs, etc. that plague certain users while other users don’t necessarily see them in their workflows. OneDrive (and Microsoft 365 as well) happens to be one of the worst offenders when it comes to user confusion, data mismanagement, and general dissatisfaction. This is not anecdotal, it’s documented across the last decade plus of support posts on Microsoft’s own support site as well as third party sites like Stack Overflow and Serverfault. If it were truly perfect and completely bug free as you say, those posts would simply not exist. Their mere presence indicates you are wrong, and like any other service, there are issues.
You’re under the mistaken impression that broad market share means zero issues or bugs, and that’s simply not the case. Not here, and not with any other large service or software package. Keep in mind that many if not most corporations and users who use Microsoft’s solutions are not doing so by choice, but because of vendor lock-in or because it’s what came with their home computer and they don’t know of or don’t care to try anything else.
The sheer volume of bug reports and questions on the above mentioned help sites clearly indicates it’s far more than “edge cases”. I’ve personally seen some really weird sync issues with OneDrive; I tried it out for a while over a decade ago when it was still known as SkyDrive since I had a Windows Phone, and while it somewhat worked, it always managed to either ignore or delete certain files eventually. Thankfully I believe in full offsite backups so I never lost anything important for any length of time, but I never fully trusted it.
I’ve dabbled with it off and on since, and it’s never been 100% reliable as a sync and backup service. One common occurrence is that I’ll create a file on a Windows 10 desktop, save it to OneDrive, open it on a Windows 11 laptop, save my changes, and when I go back to the desktop it never syncs the changed file from the laptop. The desktop file always overrides the laptop even though both are logged into the same Microsoft account and syncing to the same OneDrive instance. This breaks the very reason for its existence.
So once again, just because it works for you (and I’d put real money on the fact that either you are overlooking bugs or you’re just plain not being honest about it to prove some sort of point), doesn’t mean it isn’t broken for many, many others.
LeFantome,
You know, OneDrive used to be a syncrhonizaiton tool, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SyncToy
It was initially a standalone app called Sync Toy. I used it to basically as an “rsync for Windows” for my own documents.
Over time it got cloud based backup support, and several name changes (I think it was called “Live Sync” or something). Which later dropped all local explicit sync, and required cloud as the master copy.
Of course from a practical standpoint it makes sense. You try to do a 3-way sync between your two desktops and a laptop … which has not been used over a week….And some files being offline would mess everything up. Cloud meant the files were always online.
Anyway… there is a reason their synchronization is generally very good. (Not dismissing the bugs you have seen. But those are usually exceptions)
sukru,
IMHO it would have been far more useful to support a NAS server as an option. You know how long I’ve wanted to be able to directly mount NAS drives under android? NAS solutions are very popular even in home networks and there’s no beating their performance. I don’t have an objection to offering an online service to users who actually want that and don’t mind someone else being in possession of their data, but it is highly regressive of them to actively hamstringing user controlled solutions . Linux supports NAS filesystems just fine, the omission of NAS file systems support in android was done so that they wouldn’t compete with google’s own services. Then they have the gull to claim their cloud service is the solution to file transfer problem that they themselves were responsible for creating. Alas microsoft, apple, and google, all have a similar agenda to add roadblocks and friction around self hosting in order to promote their own proprietary services. 🙁
Microsoft should be forced to provide free security updates until 2032, when IoT version of windows 10 stops them.
As it is, is just a artificially set date.
Artificial date, yes, but one that costs money for Microsoft to extend. So if you pay for the service, you can extend it.
Even Open Source projects don’t offer that kind of support for free, with Debian and Ubuntu offering 5 years unpaid (and much longer paid).
Nobody told them to promise everyone Windows 10 would be the last and final Windows version.
https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/1cbnqjg/what_happened_to_that_story_of_windows_10_will_be/
https://www.quora.com/Microsoft-declared-that-Windows-10-would-be-their-last-Windows-but-then-came-Windows-11-Can-we-now-expect-Windows-12-13-14-etc
From your link:
What changed?
(This section has been edited for clarity on 25 April 2024.)
Many left Microsoft, including Terry Myerson, head of the Windows division. Then, COVID-19 came. The world PC market enjoyed a sudden growth. After that, Microsoft announced Windows 11.
Microsoft’s Windows-as-a-service (Waas) strategy has not changed: Windows 10 and 11 share the same major version number and product key. Increased system requirements in newer versions of Windows 10 have always been a possibility to which Microsoft constantly hinted. So were UI changes and new features.
Sure, a lot has changed, but not in the WaaS strategy.
Then no use to switch to Windows 11, if Windows is a “service”.
Otherwise Windows 10 is a different “product” than Windows 11.
What I recall was it was just a random developer who said that, and he mispoke. He meant to say that Windows 10 was the “Latest” version, not the last. All the news sites ran wild with it though and it spread everywhere. I don’t believe Microsoft ever said or intended for it to be the last version. Why would they name it Windows “10” if there weren’t going to be anymore?
“Even Open Source projects don’t offer that kind of support for free, with Debian and Ubuntu offering 5 years unpaid (and much longer paid).”
You are comparing two fundamentally different models, and on that basis I respectfully submit that your argument is invalid.
Both have the same issue, and boils down to the question. Is it an effective use of developer time to continue to patch and develop an old system less and less people are using? The answer in both scenarios is no. Please articulate why that is invalid?
Windows 10 has more market share than Windows 10. There is nothing in Windows 11 that I can not do in Windows 10. Windows 11 is shit. Full of horrible changes to the start menu taka bar and brings no real benefits.
It is not more expensive to MS to support a million pcs than to support 10 million. They should do it for free or with a very miimal, like 10 dollars per year thing. The damage to the environment they are doing because they are greedy bastards is enormous.
@Adurbe
I completely agree. They are all “artificial” dates. But I do not expect any company to work for free (even giant ones).
In my view, the issue with Windows 10 is that Microsoft was still selling it until January 31, 2023. Ending support less than 3 years after last sale is pretty crappy, especially given Microsoft’s support history. Even 5 years would be aggressive. Something like 7 – 8 years would be reasonable.
The difference between 3 years and 8 years is so great that, were I Microsoft, I would consider releasing a new Windows version just to smooth out the transition. I flesh that out in another comment.
LeFantome,
I don’t really expect free updates forever. However it was none other than microsoft that got themselves here.. It’s their fault their own policy doesn’t make long term business sense. Personally I’d be happier for these costs to be explicit rather than playing games with the planned obsolescence of perfectly working hardware, which has negative consequences to consumers and the planet.
Agree that should be the norm. Even after the reasonable default support window ends, they should allow regular consumers to explicitly buy more upgrades. Microsoft’s problem, which got them into this mess in the first place, is that by and large consumers didn’t see enough value in upgrading, and there was a serious risk of obsolete versions of windows becoming and staying more popular than supported ones. Microsoft wanted customers to “upgrade” more than the customers did. This is why upgrades became not only “free” but coercive.
IoT is a special version, frozen in time and only supporting certain versions and certain languages, so I guess it makes it a different thing. The true WTF is that they will support regular Windows 10 until he end of 2028, but only for businesses that buy ESU. They won’t even give us consumers the option to pay for ESU, despite Microsoft creating this mess by imposing mandatory sign-in in Windows 11 and cutting out perfectly functional hardware from Windows 11.
You technically can with the E3/E5 Windows 365. But for most the cost isnt palatable. The alternative is kindly as a Microsoft Reseller for one, but its not going to give them any margin so don’t expect any of the big boys to jump at th chance unless they are REALLY close to their commission target ahah
It supports all languages that are supported by Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC, which at this time are 32. And I am sure you can install any language pack into it.
I think the actual weird behavior is why they are so hell bent on enforcing the randomly set hardware requirements for Windows 11 instead of letting people upgrade.
I know their story about it being because of security, but if that was true and the specific features were really needed, then it would not be super trivial to bypass the restrictions and install it on unsupported hardware and have it work just fine. Clearly the features are still optional in the product.
I especially think the security argument is funny as the result will be millions and millions of devices that will stop receiving security updates, but still be used as there is no other reason to upgrade the hardware.
I like this news, although i feel they should simply be forced to extend the support for everyone and not have us run through hoops to receive the updates as i imagine most normal users will never figure that out. But it will at least give me another year to decide if i want to fiddle with Linux or fiddle with Windows 11 to try to extend the life of my Surface 4 pro. I use it way too rarely to justify buying a new laptop.
@Troels
> they are so hell bent on enforcing the randomly set hardware requirements for Windows 11 instead of letting people upgrade
I completely agree. This is a disaster of their own making.
Setting stricter requirements is fine. But by doing so, you should accept that people will cling to older versions as a consequence. Ending support for older versions is fine. By doing so, you should expect mass migration to newer versions. Demanding people stop using older versions while blocking them from moving to newer versions is just dumb. It is two decisions that are totally incompatible with each other. They have totally painted themselves into a corner.
They should honestly consider releasing a “Windows 12” to be the version that they want to be hard-line about hardware requirements for. They could then allow free upgrades from Windows 10 to skip the Win 11 hardware requirements (even if they keep the hardware requirements for new installs). That would allow them to move the argument to when the end of Windows 11 is instead of when the end of support for Windows 10 is. I am sure if they released Windows 12 today with free upgrades from Windows 11 (but STRICT hardware requirements) along with and end-of-support for Windows 11 say 5 years from now, few would be upset. When Windows 11 goes out of support, all new installs would have met the Windows 12 requirements for 8 years or more.
Windows 12 does not even have to be any different at first. They could keep 11 and 12 the same at the core for a few years even. It is mostly be a way to spread out the support story and work themselves out of the mess they created. The message would be “we don’t care if you use Windows 11 or Windows 12, but here is the cool new stuff in 12” (as it appears) and “nobody should be using Windows 10”.
Troels,
Yea, if you bypass the hardware checks. it works fine. Microsoft has ulterior motives for blocking the upgrades. I say follow the money. Arbitrary upgrade restrictions offer a backhand way to renege on their duplicitous “windows updates will be free forever” position. Blocking hundreds of millions of PCs from getting the updates means those users will need to buy new computers with new “forever” OEM licensees. It’s an open question how often microsoft plans on culling the herd.
Not sure how well linux works on those, but rescuing old windows computers from waste has been a primary migration method for linux users the world over. I generally assume everyone here is already familiar with installing linux, but if not then I’d recommend trying a live image as a low risk/low effort way to test drive things before installing the OS on the hard drive.
Been using Linux since 1997 🙂 My reason for staying with Windows as client os is mostly that i just can’t be assed to fiddle with software anymore, i want things that just work so i can spend my fiddling time on things that is fun. I know the attitude towards Windows in here is not great, but for me, it just works, and i don’t get regressions for things that worked fine for more than a decade like have happened multiple times with desktop linux, and i also haven’t had computers get unusable slow with os version updates as have twice happened to me with different intel macs (and an iphone). My home server though does run linux with a bunch of containers on top, and this generally just works as it always has.
Linux support for the surface stuff seems to be fair, but requires a custom kernel and some tweaking and some can’t get rid of ghost touch issues, but i will wait as long as possible before i try that road though, but it will probably be the solution once security updates for windows 10 stops as i can’t really see myself running an os that might stop working because of future updates. Yeah, the hardware requirements are easy to bypass, but who knows how long it will keep working.
Troels,
Understood. I actually have experienced plenty of regressions on windows, things breaking after upgrades. It’s frustrating because it means something that used to work no longer does. Several times I’ve had to replace working hardware because it lost support under the latest windows…I hated this so much and it’s one of the reasons I turned to linux. While linux clearly supports less off the shelf hardware sold in stores, in my experience the hardware it does support via FOSS gets supported for significantly longer since it’s less affected by a manufacturer’s EOL policy.
To be absolutely clear, it’s not my position to tell anyone to stop using windows if it’s the best solution for them. Also despite linux being my OS of choice, I do recognize that linux has it’s share of problems. Not to get into it here, but there are several things that I think linux gets wrong. So I think it’s good to have more choices; an OS doesn’t have to be good for me to be good for someone else.
I don’t trust them much either. IMHO they’re alienating their own users. Twice now forced updates really screwed me over and since my hands were tied I had to force a shutdown mid-update. I hated that, but I had no choice, microsoft did it without permission. Honestly I think crap like that merits a class action lawsuit.
You’ll still need to log in to Windows with a Microsoft account instead of a local account; this requirement hasn’t changed. The only thing that won’t be required is profile synchronization via OneDrive. Perhaps the author of the post should clarify this?
Local accounts never stopped working. Make a local account before upgrading Win10 to Win11. Change a few registry keys before upgrade. Verify again after. For new installs, easiest is using Rufus to prep the Win11 installer to have a local account created as part of the install and then a few more registry keys to verify afterwards. It’s barely more complicated than installing Win11 on ‘unsupported’ hardware (which in most cases requires changing a single registry key).
Enturbulated,
For how long though? I personally am not confident in microsoft’s intentions for the future.
You’re right, but having tools to hack out deliberate restrictions from microsoft’s software does not mean we should stop criticizing these restrictions. Remember when initially there were simple tricks to bypass these requirements: killing a process, entering a bad account 3 times, shutting down the internet, etc. Microsoft has been gradually removing the holes and pressuring more customers to comply.
I think this is all intentional. Microsoft has a history of using “the art of war” tactics. They recognize that a sudden forceful assault on everyone creates too much uproar and the backlash could threaten their agenda. The solution: build up the walls, but pacifying the strongest critics by letting them use ladders to get over them. This lets microsoft fortify their control over time while normalizing the results they want. Those holes may not last forever though and in the end game the very same critics who stood down because they could “beat the system” may find their position significantly weakened once those holes are closed.
This is why. if you value freedom, you can’t or shouldn’t turn a blind eye to it’s erosion just because it’s being taken away piecemeal.
“Turn a blind eye” ? Nope. There’s a long list of reasons I don’t use Windows anymore and strongly suggest anyone who can get away does. Just that if one is stuck, there are options.
“For how long though?” Microsoft is playing chicken with this, but Enterprise customers won’t go along. This will leave loopholes for those who are stuck with Windows and are motivated enough to bother.
Enturbulated,
Enterprise customers have their own licenses. it wouldn’t be difficult for microsoft to lock down the consumer version while giving different rights to enterprise customers.
“Enterprise customers have their own licenses.”
For business use, last I looked you could still get single seat Enterprise for where it matters. For home users, I would say users are incentivized to care as much about the content of the license as Microsoft does about respecting legalities and user choices… as in not even a single shit.
“…you need to start using OneDrive and you’ll have to start paying for additional storage, as the basic 5 GB of OneDrive storage won’t be enough for backups.”
No, you only need to pay IF you WANT to back up everything on your PC (because, of course, with that stupid decision, your cloud drive space would be used up almost immediately).
But you don’t have to PAY. You can choose to sync only system settings and a few files, for example.
You can also simply redeem 1,000 reward points (I didn’t even know about these points, and I already had over 2,000 of them, possibly from occasional Bing usage or rare purchases I’ve made over the years in the Microsoft Store).
Even so, I didn’t need to use this method, as I was already eligible for ESU due to syncing my settings to OneDrive. In short, you only pay if you want, and using OneDrive is still optional, as there are other options.
Here are the ESU requirements:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/extended-security-updates#bkmk_prerequisites
Note: This doesn’t just apply to Europe; I live in Brazil.